The Mille Lacs Treaty Case is over,
but don't stop fighting for what you believe in.

By Howard Hanson

I'm sure that all PERM supporters were as devastated as I was by the
March 23 Supreme Court ruling on the Mille Lacs treaty case. We had all
worked so hard and diligently to reach what we perceived as our last hope
to save the resources of our state, and had been joined in the battle from
concerned citizens all across the country. And I'm sure you know by now
that it was a much-disputed 5-4 opinion, with Chief Justice Renquist among
those dissenting. Here's how his dissent begins:

"The Court holds that the various Bands of Chippewa Indians retain
a usufructuary right granted to them in an 1837 Treaty. To reach this result,
the Court must successively conclude that: (1) an 1850 Executive Order
explicitly revoking the privilege as authorized by the 1837 Treaty was
unlawful; (2) an 1855 Treaty under which certain Chippewa Bands ceded "all"
interests to the land does not include the treaty right to come onto the
land and hunt; and (3) the admission of Minnesota into the Union in 1858
did not terminate the discretionary hunting privilege, despite established
precedent of this Court to the contrary. Because I believe that each one
of these three conclusions is demonstrably wrong, I dissent."

In his strong dissent, Justice Renquist goes on to use the words "jurisprudential
legerdemain" (sleight-of-hand magic) and "bait and switch"
so you can see there were strong feelings and nothing was "cut and
dried" about this case so many people called a waste of time and money.

But, like the Monday morning quarterbacking Bud Grant had to deal with
throughout his coaching career, it's always an easy but ultimately fruitless
exercise to second-guess why we lost. "If only the State of Minnesota
had placed more emphasis on the Indian Claims Commission Payments, etc.
etc." Right now, there's a better use for the space in this column.

First, I'd like to thank all of you who took the time to become informed
on the issues--and then got involved and gave of your time and money for
a cause you felt was right. Feel good about yourself, even if you don't
feel good about the decision. The highest court in the land has ruled,
and we can only hope that our resources will somehow be managed by the
awkward combination of DNR and Tribal authority, so that our children and
grandchildren will be able to fish and hunt in this state.

I am reminded of an article from February 10, 1997, St. Paul Pioneer
Press' in which Nick Coleman wrote: "Around the world, the United
Nations is preparing a Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.
From Montana to Manila, tribal rights are being reasserted. Minnesota,
with a strong tradition of human rights, and lots of nice, theoretical
talk, should be ashamed to be in court in 1997, still fighting a retrograde
action to deny indigenous treaty rights." Thanks Nick, for making
it clear where you stand. At least 4 Supreme Court Justices felt there
was another point of view.

World wide, it seems, there is a movement to give back, or take back,
the lands and resources in the name of indigenous peoples.

Recently, the media has been filled with stories about tribal takeover
of land in Mexico, Brazil, Borneo and Canada. In Mexico, armed and masked
Chiapas are running poor peasants out of their villages. Many people have
been slaughtered. In Brazil, jungle tribal members are shooting arrows
at farmers. In Borneo, just this week, armed tribal guerrillas are slaughtering
peasant farmer immigrants and driving around displaying their heads and
other body parts hanging from their vehicles in a rather hideous takeover
of land. It is all done in the name of social justice, but often the governments
are simply "using" the indigenous peoples to channel the resource
wealth back to the industries who fund their politics. Timber, minerals,
oil, fish, game...the money from all these resources somehow always ends
up with industry and government, not the people in whose name it was taken--the
people to whom it was supposedly "given" or "returned".

Just this week, Canada gave back 770,000 square miles of land to 27,000
Inuit citizens. The new territory will be called "Nunavet", an
area about the size of Mexico which represents a fifth of Canada's land
mass. The region has only 27,000 people (85 percent of them Eskimos, or
Inuit) in 28 communities. Caribou outnumber people 28 to 1. The New York
Times quotes Prime Minister Jean Chretien, who calls the move " the
last major change in the country's map", and refers to Nunavut as
a "rare and precious opportunity." Other Canadians criticized
it as a waste of money and, worse, a dangerous precedent for fostering
racial tribalism. "One-fifth of Canada will be put under a government
whose purpose it is to represent one ethnic group," an Ottawa Citizen
said in a recent editorial. "Canada will have its first Bantustan,
an apartheid-style ethnic homeland."

The new Inuit-led government faces enormous challenges. With few industries
or natural resources (yet discovered) in the territory, bureaucracy is
the only sure source of new jobs to combat the region's high unemployment.
More than 90 percent of its annual budget will come from the federal government.
There is no lack of southern Canadians who see Nunavut as a well-intentioned
but doomed effort, a territory born with almost total reliance on federal
money and lacking the experience and skills to be run efficiently. Nunavut's
challenges are enormous. It starts out with some of Canada's highest rates
of unemployment, alcohol and substance abuse, and suicide. An article in
the New York Times quotes a critic who questions the need for one more
layer of government. "The federal government has committed $1 billion
to Nunavut," said Mike Scott, an opposition member of the federal
Parliament from British Columbia and Indian affairs critic for the Reform
Party. "That is a staggering price-tag for some questionable gains."

You only have to look at the Canadian economy to see the devastation
caused by race-based control of territory and natural resources. Just recently,
Ottawa Chief Justice Antonio Lamer gave control of 95% of the British Columbia
land mass to 4.9% of the population while writing the majority decision
in a treaty lawsuit Delgamuukw vs. British Columbia. This decision will
plunge British Columbia's economy and public finances into confusion and
dysfunction, according to David Hanley of the Fraser Institute of Vancouver.

Meanwhile, on the Canadian side of Rainy Lake, for the past decade,
the Canadian government has been systematically tearing apart its huge
sportsfishing, tourism-based economy by turning over control of its territory
and natural resources to its "First Nation" citizens. In all
these situations, tribalism is promoted, and economics are overlooked.
Fish fillets that could be worth $90-$150 per pound if caught by a tourist
staying at a resort are gillnetted and cross the border by the truckload
for $1-$3 per pound. As over-harvest occurs because of gillnetting, officials
then restrict water access to sportsfishing tourists and cut their resource
allocation. It is not hard to figure out why the Canadian dollar is now
worth only 60 U.S. cents.

Here in the U.S., according to Liberty Matters March 11 news bulletin,
U.S. District Judge Royce C. Lamberth has ordered hearings into accusations
that documents sought in a lawsuit concerning the Interior Department's
oversight of American Indian trust funds were deliberately destroyed. Secretary
of Interior Babbitt and Treasury Secretary Ruben were charged with contempt
of court last month when the agencies refused to turn over records in the
case. An audit by the accounting firm Arthur Andersen has determined that
the Bureau of Indian Affairs cannot account for $2.4 billion in tribal
trust funds.

Two weeks later, the March 26 Wall Street Journal carried a story in
which an Interior Department lawyer, Ralph Williams, in a sworn affidavit,
claims that "the department's second-ranking lawyer "directed"
him to reconcile data in various trust-fund accounts and told him that
any information that didn't fit with Mr. William's analysis "could
be purged from the files."

According to a series of articles in the Minneapolis Star Tribune, the
Bureau of Indian Affairs is our most corrupt federal agency. If $2.4 billion
were missing from any other place in the public or private sector, people
would be in jail. What is scary to me is that the Clinton administration,
his Justice Department, our own Senator Wellstone who sits on the Senate
Select Committee on Indian Affairs, our own former Governor and Attorney
General, and five members of the Supreme Court are all perpetuating this
corrupt federal Indian policy agenda.

We must not give up fighting injustice and corruption in our government
wherever it exists. Edmund Burke, the famous British House of Commons member
who died just over 200 years ago, claimed that "The only thing necessary
for the triumph of evil is for enough good men to do nothing." I've
always believed that and, in my view, there are still plenty of battles
to be fought, especially with regard to our BIA and failed Federal Indian
policies.

PERM is the only organization educating and protecting the citizens
of our state from these corrupt and lawless agendas.

There are enough value-oriented citizens who will gladly give us their
support once they learn the true facts. PERM has done great things in its
six year existence and can do many more with your continued support. Grass
roots is hard work, but we can be thankful that we live in a country where
we can effect change.

PERM was formed to protect the interests of the private citizens in
this case. The Landowners are still parties to the ongoing management process
and if the State or Bureau of Indian Affairs attempt to give the Chippewa
more than was awarded, or if they harm the resource, they can be sued under
a civil rights action. Thanks to PERM, this decision is not a total disaster
for the citizens of the state.

Let's start by demanding that our elected officials abide by their oaths
of office and abide by the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Tell all of
your friends to join PERM today. This battle is over, but the war for equal
rights and the resources continues.